What fuel do you use in your MG Maestro Turbo?

[E_T_V]

No, but weren't the late carb and EFI 2 litre cars unleaded form the factory? I thought they were the same as my little A series was


Just to clarify there is no issue running 95RON unleaded in the MG turbos even though they were never approved to run as such.

[guussi]

i sometimes put 100ml of nail varnish remover before i fill up to give it a spring clean [in my non rover 1.0i16v mk2 nissan micra] keeps engine nice and clean funny enough etv will scorn-but i also drop heavy noble metal bits in my tank and a 20+lb pull welders magnet on the fuel line adjacent to fuel rail!!

now for a 16year old banger 96' 92k on the clock id say something was working-my emissions are that of a new car according to the MOT man whose left bewildered dazed and left confused
the last other mOT man was also such after doing the emissions on my derv perkie-i say fluck the road tax as its unfair my emissions are zippo compared to less road taxed newer cars.....but then they're going to scrap the road tax for pay per view

[guussi]

dry fuel

if some dried petrol soup is left in the tank after being stored and you want to drive it [fuel goes off] i'd put in the highest octane fuel via jerry and add wynns dry fuel for the condensed water at the bottom that was once within the fuel and above the fuel in the tank

there is a small percentage of water content in fuel and will eventually condense more so in diesel

HIGH OCTANE FUEL
id say one emissions are reduced as the fuel is more combustible leaving less tarnish-if you have a fine ear you will high higher revs with the engine as more energy is released for same volume burned-the result isnt noticeable as every driving condition is never the same-the car is slightly more responsive and torguey in my experience - one often prefers the response with the heavy foot and goes faster being more expensive.....

[matthewsemple]

now for a 16year old banger 96' 92k on the clock id say something was working-my emissions are that of a new car according to the MOT man whose left bewildered dazed and left confused

My MG Maestro 1600 is the same. Its CO reading is low enough to pass as a catalyst-equipped car even though it doesn't have one and could be much lower.

the last other mOT man was also such after doing the emissions on my derv perkie-i say fluck the road tax as its unfair my emissions are zippo compared to less road taxed newer cars.....but then they're going to scrap the road tax for pay per view

You are confusing CO and CO2 readings - one is carbon monoxide produced and the is carbon dioxide consumed. The tests done at the MOT are for carbon monoxide parts per million and has nothing to do with the carbon dioxide per kilometer test that has been on new models since 2001.

[E_T_V]

Easy enough to get the MG to pass the natural idle test, but the revving one would be a lot more of a challenge

[guussi]

my cars are ultra low on carbon monoxide-i would like to do a comparable conversion for pre 01 cars to make sure were not paying over the odds in car tax-both my maestro, GTE's and micras all pull very good mpg's! -id say probably used less CO2 in production being more green-if any thing they should be encouraged to be kept on the road-use less power without silly gadgets or over complicated circuitry and devices, no aircon more co2

i need to get stuck into some research on this and see what i find. at the end of the day the yard stick is how far your car goes on the same amount of fuel-the engine size etc precat cars do 10% better mpg and thus burn 10% less petrol stick that in the co2 readings? CATS dont work until there hot and most car journeys done dont get to the operating temp!